[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171027113518.GD17415@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 13:35:18 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, opendmb@...il.com,
Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@...madesigns.com>,
slash.tmp@...e.fr, david.daney@...ium.com, geert+renesas@...der.be
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/4] net: phy: PHY_HALTED, the return of the state
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 04:21:20PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch series tries to address the shortcomings of the previously and then
> quickly reverted commit 7ad813f208533cebfcc32d3d7474dc1677d1b09a ("net: phy:
> Correctly process PHY_HALTED in phy_stop_machine()")
>
> This time, the empire returns and strikes back with a few additional changes:
>
> - catch phy_disconnect() calls without prior phy_stop() and warn when that
> happens since that means a driver is not behaving properly. This is AFAIR
> the case in which David Daney ran into
>
> - what David also was running into is that when the PHY state machine was
> already in PHY_HALTED, its synchronous call in phy_disconnect() would make
> us re-schedule ourselves at the end. This is unnecessary, and we now take
> care of that
>
> - finally, Geert experienced bus errors on smsc911x for a number of reasons,
> but the primary one is that the driver does not do any management of the
> PHY state machine during suspend/resume. The last patch corrects that, and
> also suggests that the driver should be fixed to properly support Wake-on-LAN
> configuration to possibly suspend the PHY.
>
> David, Marc and Geert, I would appreciate if you could give this patch series
> a spin on your respective HW and confirm that the desired functionality is
> achieved.
Hi Florian
I quickly look through these patches and they all seem
sensible. Feedback from the listed people would however be good.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists